On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:14:51 -0500 James Bottomley wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 08:06 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:27:26 -0500 James Bottomley wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 16:05 +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > > +       err = pci_enable_device(pdev);
> > > > +       if (err < 0)
> > > > +               return err;
> > > 
> > > Traditionally, this should be 
> > > 
> > > if (err)
> > >   return err;
> > > 
> > > The reason is that <0 is a signed comparison which can be slightly more
> > > expensive on some architectures and it's unnecessary if zero is the only
> > > successful return.
> > 
> > Tradition vs. Linus, eh?  Linus wrote (2007-Mar-06, on lkml,
> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>):
> 
> Sure ... we can all maintain our own traditions .. what was the subject
> of this email?

The subject was coding style and return/error codes.
The Subject: line was: Re: [5/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to